Is this a bug in SQL 2000/2005?

Running the script below the error number is not generated and the
transaction is rolled back ...
Should be like this, or it should nicely give the error number and let me
decide what to do?
This is very usefull when using EXECUTE() or sp_executesql().

Here is hwo you can reproduce the problem:

CREATE TABLE xTest (IDCol int, xText varchar(100))

INSERT INTO xTest(IDCol,xText1) VALUES (1,'aaa')
SELECT @@ERROR --should be 207

DROP TABLE xTest

Some errors terminates the batch. See the error handling articles at www.sommarsko
g.se for details.

--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/


"Florin Lazar" < FlorinLazar@discussi
ons.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A436FCDD-B959-42C6-965F- 4D40B47F6434@microso
ft.com...
> Running the script below the error number is not generated and the
> transaction is rolled back ...
> Should be like this, or it should nicely give the error number and let me
> decide what to do?
> This is very usefull when using EXECUTE() or sp_executesql().
>
> Here is hwo you can reproduce the problem:
>
> CREATE TABLE xTest (IDCol int, xText varchar(100))
>
> INSERT INTO xTest(IDCol,xText1) VALUES (1,'aaa')
> SELECT @@ERROR --should be 207
>
> DROP TABLE xTest

The batch does not compile, and thus it is never executed. So the line
"SELECT @@ERROR" will never be executed.

Gert-Jan


Florin Lazar  wrote:
>
> Running the script below the error number is not generated and the
> transaction is rolled back ...
> Should be like this, or it should nicely give the error number and let me
> decide what to do?
> This is very usefull when using EXECUTE() or sp_executesql().
>
> Here is hwo you can reproduce the problem:
>
> CREATE TABLE xTest (IDCol int, xText varchar(100))
>
> INSERT INTO xTest(IDCol,xText1) VALUES (1,'aaa')
> SELECT @@ERROR --should be 207
>
> DROP TABLE xTest